Why would someone say this about vaccines? Is it odd?

[PuzzlingPanda]

Was in a health food shop today and mentioned an ongoing issue I'm having with one of my do.

The man mentioned he thought the biggest thing going wrong with our children was all the vaccines they receive. He said they full of nasties, designed to make people ill.

It could be put down to a man having a pointless rant but why would he say this? Is there any sort of truth in it?

Not the first time I've heard negative things about vaccines.

Now I'm worried about it.

I have a question, and its a genuine one, can anyone tell me why parents weren't offered the single vaccines on the NHS when the whole MMR/Wakefield thing was going on? Not the answer that NOW his work is discredited, because hindsight is great, but at the time, when so many people were concerned, if the aim is to vax as many kids as possible and reach herd immunity, then why not just give the singles and get it done?

www.meningitisnow.org/support-us/news-centre/news-stories/first-evidence-session-use-vaccine-held-today/

"I have a question, and its a genuine one, can anyone tell me why parents weren't offered the single vaccines on the NHS when the whole MMR/Wakefield thing was going on? Not the answer that NOW his work is discredited, because hindsight is great, but at the time, when so many people were concerned, if the aim is to vax as many kids as possible and reach herd immunity, then why not just give the singles and get it done?"

Largely because his work was never rated by the wider medical community (it was basically a media storm) because single vaccines would have been prohibitively expensive, take up was likely to be low and who wants to give a baby 3 injections when 1 would do. I think that's it- anyone else?

Bert, single vaccines were still available on the NHS when concerns about the MMR were raised. They were withdrawn 6 months later. It was a terrible decision.

I agree GreatFuckability, if the aim was to keep children immune to measles then the single vaccine should have been kept available.

I'm halfway through the meningitis discussion. I agree, YouCannot, they've made some interesting points about needing earlier diagnosis etc.

I may be wrong as this is hearsay/trying to remember bits Iv read over the years here and there - but I think that the UK had already stockpiled MMR vaccine and would have made a substantial financial loss if they didn't use it. And as there was no concrete evidence MMR was unsafe they decided to carry on as planned

Again I think that Wakefield found vaccine strain measles virus in the gut of some autistic children (but i have never read his "research" or book as I personally believe how he collected this info was unethical)

My own reflection on this would be that if he only found measles virus and not mumps or rubella then presumably that would indicate a potential problem with both the MMR and the single vaccine. Therefore if they took his concerns seriously they'd need to shelve both vaccines??

Again from memory so could be wrong but Iv heard he had a patent on an entirely different measles vaccine that had his concerns been reproduced and the U.K. seen this they'd have been forced to use the vaccine he was involved with if they wanted to continue aiming to eliminate measles thus earning him a lot of money

My thoughts are that it's missing another point of view if they found measles strain in the guts of autistic children - could it not be that autistic children have guts which allow virus' to penetrate? As opposed to any child being able to be affected.

I might be wrong but that's my take on it. Iv never been concerned about the MMR due to anything related to Wakefield.

Actually I'd like to know if there's any research regarding the permeability of guts of children with ASD??

Someone's missing a trick there...

I know nobody who doesn't want to protect their child against preventable diseases. Those I know of who are cautious vaccinators are ones who feel the risk doesn't outweigh the benefit or have other concerns for some vaccines and therefore follow a schedule tailored more to their own child's personal risk/benefit

But I accept there are people who don't vaccinate as they still believe the myth it could cause autism too (or even those parents who have no other proof yet for why their child's autism symptoms onset coincided with vaccines)

I know there's also a few people who for religious reasons don't want to interfere with what they view as up to God but other than the Amish community when I hear religious reasons cited it's usually not because of that at all but because someone has been spreading conspiracy theory around mosques and churches about illuminati and bug pharma

If it is true that autistic children have more permeable guts to viruses then surely somebody could develop a test of sorts that could be used prior to a vaccine to determine that?

Cautious vaxxers are usually willing to pay for reassurance they've vaccinated the best way for their own child - even if the healthcare system couldn't afford a test like that, I bet some parents would be prepared to pay privately

Someone is definitely missing a trick! Probably someone will come and give me research that makes this a moot point in a minute but if there isn't and I had the funds I may consider creating that test myself

Wakefield didnt find measles in the guts of children at all, the results were faulty, he was told that by his assistant Nicholas Chadwick,but went ahead and published anyway.

Pigeon- you seem to be suggesting that vaccines do cause autism in some children-am I misunderstanding you

My child is dead yes DEAD a vaccine may have saved her.

Ah well Iv made a moot point then bruffin...

Although i suppose I could take my hypothetical test and suggest the guts of people with auto-immune conditions are researched for permeability as opposed to people with ASCs since that's the more common concern of some parents these days (I think?)

Mind you might still be a moot point if how vaccines affect the gut has been studied and the answer is they don't?? Anyone know?

I'm making the link with gut/immune system which is where I thought Wakefield had gone in the first place but seems i was wrong to assume that?

Pigeon- you seem to be suggesting that vaccines do cause autism in some children-am I misunderstanding you

Definitely misunderstanding me. I don't believe they do at all??? Why do I imply that??

I did wonder (personally) if in some children a vaccine could trigger or worsen ASD symptoms. But if a vaccine could - so could catching the virus presumably and I imagine there's less virus in a vaccine than catching something naturally anyhow? So the vaccine would still be the better choice

My child is dead yes DEAD a vaccine may have saved her.

I know, and I am so sorry. I hope I haven't given you the impression that I want anything other than MORE people to vaccinate. And more people to feel confident to vaccinate.

I personally paid for the MenB vaccine long before it was common knowledge and on the NHS. But I only knew about it because I knew so called "anti or cautious vaccinators" who used private clinics for their children's vaccine schedule (and did so myself)

MenB is a horrendous rapid illness of which I was fortunate enough to have the opportunity to try and prevent in my child when others didn't. And I stand with you in campaigning for it to be accessible to all children to be as protected as is possible by MenB.

Yes pigeonpoo
Anything that causes a fever or puts a huge strain on the body like diaorreah will have the same or worse in someone who has mitochondrial disease.
My son has GEFS+ which mean he had abormal febrile convulsions until he was 13. Included in Gefs is Dravett syndrome. Children have epiliepsy from young babies but it causes serious brain damage. This was mistaken for vaccine damage in the past until they discovered the marker. Any fever would set it off not just a fever caused by vaccines.

pigeon No i don't think you are against vaccine, just get so very very tired of others. Pleased you got your dc the jab.
Daisy was diagnosed correctly by GP and a&e so I didn't have the runaround that Jenny and Neil had. She developed sepsis so quickly she didn't stand a chance. Got her to hospital at 5. 30 pm and she diec at 3..42 am
As for costs it's a no brainer as Lee said.
I'm am still costing the country an awful lot of money in counselling and drugs. Didn't work for a long time after death so loss of taxes and claimed benefits etc. At least Daisy will not cost the NHS any more money, unlike the amputees and brain damaged.

It comes down to what cost a life
Have you seen this
www.meningitis.org/ctc

It comes down to what cost a life
Have you seen this *
http://www.meningitis.org/ctcc

I hadn't seen that, no. It was a while ago now that I made my decision now on the menB vaccine and I'm not sure if I frequented that website at the time or not but I hadn't seen that counting the cost information.

Sadly counting the cost won't just apply to families and children affected by vaccine preventable diseases but also to the far smaller minority who are affected permanently by severe vaccine reactions.

If there was any way to improve confidence in vaccinating for any parent whose either been that minority or known someone who has, or someone like myself who journeyed through a fear of vaccines for other reasons (Iv shared my story of the bits that bought me to where I sit today earlier in the thread) - I'm all for it. But I see it as a common goal and sad it's seperated into two sides when families have actually been affected awfully by the illnesses or the vaccine. That's why I come on these threads from time to time really - I believe there's not really 2 sides usually, only parents who want to protect their children.

And it's not really financial cost to us is it? That's only really the governments argument. No parent can put a price on their child's wellbeing and we shouldn't be forced to to persuade the government to make something accessible. I know that's not reality. But it angers me.

Anything that causes a fever or puts a huge strain on the body like diaorreah will have the same or worse in someone who has mitochondrial disease.

That's really interesting bruffin - how did Hannah Polling get awarded the compensation and acknowledgment if it would have happened anyway?

Or was it because she was given so much in one go? Though surely more vaccines can't create more fever? Or can they? The more her body tried to fight the higher her temperature went?

Or was it just that she came across the vaccines before the illnesses and they could prove the vaccine triggered her following condition? Therefore you can compensate as a direct link whereas it could have happened anyway with a natural infection but nobody would be able accept responsibility and provide compensation? Unless they knew exactly who'd passed something to her and they could have prevented it

Thanks pigeon
You may find this interesting or may have read it. Useful info anyway
www.meningitisnow.org/how-we-help/campaigns/beat-it-now/faqs-on-meningitis-b-vaccine/

I think Hannah poling was classed as a table injury. The american system has a table of symptoms that if they happen within a certain time period after ie in her case encephaly 2 days later, compensation is paid out of the fund.
I think she was originally included in the autism omnibus procedings but was withdrawn to make a table injury claim.

Thanks for the link Sugar

I have just one problem with the menB vaccine as it is in the schedule. I completely believe it should be in the schedule. My concern is we have research (last I checked) that showed using paracetamol alongside vaccines can make them less effective.

Now we know this is not the case for the MenB vaccine.

But it is given at the same time as other vaccines and the paracetamol alongside may make those vaccines less effective. It may cause an increase in other diseases we vaccinate for by going this way about it.

Therefore if I ever have any more dc I would personally choose to vaccinate separately for MenB using a private clinic. Especially as I also know the menB vaccine is more likely to cause fever than other vaccines so it increases the need for an anti-pyretic

I chose not to give paracetamol with the menB and was fortunate with my sons doses he only had mild fever. I also disagree with the advice that paracetamol should be given. I personally think any medicine should only be given if it's needed as any combination of medicines surely increases the risk of complications?My son didn't need it.

It comes down to cost why this is advised. The government cannot afford to vaccinate every child the way I think is safest in terms of keeping up both herd immunity of other diseases and individual protection of MenB. It would cost far too much in extra appointments and time. And would risk an increase in people's opinions that there are too many vaccines given nowadays as lots of parents don't realise just how many diseases can be covered in one vaccine. They might only count the 5 in 1 vaccine as 1 as they see one needle - but ask them to come back an extra 3 times, it may promote that opinion

So I understand why it is. But I disagree and am grateful for the choice I have to make an individual decision how and when I vaccinate.

pigeonpoo I agree with almost all you say re. the Men B vaccine, even though I personally chose not to get it privately. The human cost from both the diseases and the vaccines needs to be taken into account. I hate the term cost effectiveness as it dehumanises, however necessary the process is. I wish there was more research into who is likely to react badly and why, so that everyone could be reassured, but all too often we're told we just have to accept that some will be damaged as collateral damage.

Wrt the paracetamol, studies quoted in the last JCVI minutes confirmed that the paracetamol does indeed make the other jabs less effective. I hope this doesn't translate into increases in those diseases but only time will tell. I can see why they give it to everyone though, the levels of fever without it were really very high, especially for such young babies, and so a wait and see approach would result in lots of very poorly babies after the vaccine (I know of at least one who was hospitalised even with paracetamol).

And yes, as I've mentioned up thread I think spreading out the vaccines is a much safer way of doing it, but it would be much more expensive as you say, and critically parents might be less likely to come back if their dcs had bad reactions for instance.

pigeon I would have paid for Daisy to have the MenB jab but it wasn't available until after she died.

Yes it's your choice about the paracetomol or calpol. I gave the magic pink juice to Daisy while we were waiting for the GP appt
I wish I has taken her straight to a&e but with no visible rash I thought she had the flu.

The points raised this afternoon all fit

Straight to a&e

time is life saving, AND
there is NOT always a rash. The rash that appeared later was sepsis and deadly

I wish there was more research into who is likely to react badly and why, so that everyone could be reassured, but all too often we're told we just have to accept that some will be damaged as collateral damage.

Exactly. Why should parents be forced into reducing their children to statistics and cost effectiveness when caring about their children's health. It's an injustice that makes someone like me wish that vaccines were mandatory. (I do objectively agree a mandatory vaccine schedule isn't the answer, but emotively I wish I as a parent wasn't forced to make a choice based on which fear is greater) I don't think the extreme version of a mandatory vaccine schedule I wish for to remove all responsibility from parents exists anywhere in the world. I only wish for the responsibility to be removed to prevent the guilt that must come if your the person suffering awful consequences on either side - because you gave a vaccine, or because you didn't give it.

Researchers can be objective enough to look at research, read and interpret data and make up what's the best for the greater good

But for any parent, it really comes down to which fear is greater. Do you fear the disease more? Or do you fear the adverse vaccine reaction more? Either way - you could be on the wrong side of whichever decision you make. Either for your own child or someone else's indirectly - say if they caught something you didn't vaccinate for.

A better answer would be to research who reacts and why and discover the answers that would enable MORE parents to be basing their choice on fact. If you can PROVE your child won't react - who the heck other than the true tin foil hat brigade, wouldn't vaccinate 100%?

I agree pigeon re giving the MenB vaccine alongside the others in the schedule even though prophylactic paracetamol is recommended. I, personally, would choose to separate it as well but, like YouCannot, I have not given it to my older children because they aren't in the at risk group and are actually less at risk now than when they were babies due to the decrease in the number of cases of MenB in recent years.

I just finished the MenB discussion and it was very interesting. If anyone has 1 1/2 hours to spare you can watch it here

The idea of trying to diagnose meningitis quicker came up a lot. Faye missed an opportunity to receive antibiotic treatment because she was misdiagnosed with a 'viral infection'. I completely agree with her father that blood should be taken for testing if meningitis is even suspected and antibiotic treatment needs to start sooner to limit the possible impact. I mentioned on another thread that new diagnostic tests have been developed that can identify meningitis in an hour. It seems like they would be very much in favour of anything that can reduce that 'guessing game' so perhaps that is something that will be discussed next week.

What did worry me slightly was that there seemed to be a suggestion that having the vaccine would rule out the need for a doctor to consider meningitis in a vaccinated patient. Given that we know that the vaccine isn't 100% effective and that effectiveness against the 4 different strains in the MenB vaccine varies and can wane at different rates, I really don't think we can assume that a vaccinated patient can't have meningitis. We still need better, faster diagnostic tests.

Also, there wasn't any mention of boosters being required - they've based cost calculations on 3 doses but, according to the manufacturer's info, a booster dose may be needed ~ 30 months later so possibly a couple of boosters to get children to their teenage years. That all adds to cost. I'm sure this will all be discussed in greater detail next week. They were just a couple of points that I picked up.

pigeon That is exactly what I hate, my child is a statistic just a number for researchers to quote
When your child becomes that number it is devastating and feels inhuman.

bumbley I have already posted that link.